|
Case 24/86, Blaizot v
University of Liège,
1988 ECR 379, 1989:1 CMLR 57.
Facts: Mr. Blaizot and other students of French nationality
who studied veterinary medicine at Belgian Universities upon the Courts
judgment in the Gravier case had claimed repayment of enrolment fees which had
been charged to them but not to students of Belgian nationality. After the
delivery of the judgment in Gravier the Belgian legislation had brought forward
a law that excluded claims for repayment, except only for nationals of a Member
State
who have undertaken vocational training and who have initiated proceedings for
repayment before the courts before the day of the aforementioned judgment
Issue: whether studies in veterinary medicine constituted
“vocational training” and thus fell in the scope of the Treaty.
Holding: the university studies in question constitute
vocational training and therefore the imposition of fee on nationals of a
Member State
which is not charged from students of the host
Member State
constitutes discrimination contrary to Article 7 of the Treaty.
Reasoning: The Court did not find any indication in Article 128 of the
Treaty that the concept of vocational training was not so limited as to
generally exclude university education. Furthermore, it points out that
university training could not be excluded from the definition of the term
“vocational training” since significant variations existed in that certain
studies are undertaken in universities in some Member States but not in others.
Uniform application of the Community law therefore mandated not to generally
exclude university studies from the concept of vocational training.
(This definition of vocational training was later applied to almost all
disciplines of higher education.
|
